Local News

Re-admission policy fails in split vote

Board wants state to look at allowing more than one student count day

Following a split vote by the RE-1 Valley Board of Education, the district will not be changing its admission policy to prohibit students living in the district, but enrolled in another school (including online) or homeschool, from enrolling in the district after the Oct. 1 student count date.

Dena Vogel moved to approve policy JF, regarding admission and denial of admission, for first reading, and Dennis Kaan seconded the motion. After some discussion though, the board voted 5-2 against the policy, with Jennifer Ogley and Marty Smock in favor of it.

Principals brought this policy request to the board at a previous meeting, seeking to get families to think twice before leaving the district, only to return again late in the semester. They cited the challenges staff face when having to re-enroll a student and find a way to get them back on track academically, as well as the financial burden it places on the district, because districts do not receive per pupil funding from the state for students who arrive after the state's Oct. 1 count date.

Advertisement

At the board's previous meeting, Superintendent Dr. Jan DeLay said she had the attorney review the possible policy and he asked that the district check with its self-insurance pool to make sure if there is a family that disagreed with the district and went to court over it the district would be covered. Monday, she told the board the self-insurance pool doesn't believe the district would be liable because if someone was really giving a push on it "you just let them in," DeLay said.

The policy did state that the superintendent may allow re-admittance only if unusual circumstances exist to justify the decision and must inform the board when such a decision is made.

DeLay mentioned that she talked to different community members and staff members about this possible policy, and there was really a split, with some in favor and some against it.

"My take on it is by the end of adopting something like this and getting a lot of people angry at our school district for having such a hard line on this, I'm just not sure that's the hill to die on," she told the board, also adding that just because other districts in the state are doing it doesn't mean RE-1 should.

Riste Capps agreed, arguing that RE-1 is a public school district and its job is to educate all children in the district and it doesn't seem in line with the district's mission that everything it does and every decision it makes is predicated upon how student achievement will be impacted.

Myra Westfall also agreed, pointing out that when it comes down to it, the district will let the students in, because it's the law.

Smock asked about how online schools' graduation requirements match up with RE-1's requirements. Assistant Superintendent Ron Marostica said there is no match. Smock questioned how the district can get those students back on track to meet those requirements when they return. Marostica said they do let them know the graduation requirements when they return and that they have work to do to catch up.

DeLay said it does help to have the Edge online blended learning software and the new intervention programs the board approved at a previous meeting with the Edginuity software contract will provide further help.

Mike Anderson said he understands if the district wants to tell students who want to come back three weeks before the semester ends that they need to come back at the start of the new semester. DeLay said that does happen, but they'll try to put students in credit recovery at least, if at all possible.

Vogel asked if there could be compromise on the policy and have it just state that the district accepts re-admittance at the beginning of a new semester. DeLay said the statute doesn't hold up on that either; the district is pretty much supposed to bring students in when they come to the door, once the district is assured they're not dangerous.

Anderson asked if a disruptive student can be kicked out. DeLay said they can, but the district has to provide home school services for that student.

"I don't think we can give up on any of our kids and even putting them off until the fall, a couple of months can really mess a kid up," Capps said.

DeLay pointed out RE-1 has a very dedicated staff that doesn't give up on students. She spoke of two students that came back last March and a teacher at Sterling High School worked with them evening, morning, doing all these extra things.

"It's just that I think staff sometimes feel like they're getting kicked in the teeth when parents allow their kids to just flit in and out," DeLay said. "There is some frustration that I think the board could acknowledge."

Kaan acknowledged the principals' concerns from a fiscal standpoint.

"I really respect our principals; they really don't have bad intentions for kids by trying to put some of this in the policy — what they're trying to do is prevent it to begin with. But, the thing that we're trying to do with this policy is we're trying to band aid a problem that really could be fixed if the state had three enrollment days, Oct. 1, December something and February something," DeLay told the board.

It is something that the legislature has looked at, but never takes action on.

Kaan suggested bringing that up at the CASB (Colorado Association of School Boards) Delegate Assembly.

In the meantime, DeLay said "I just think we try other strategies to keep kids here," adding that RE-1 is well on its way with trying to do more and more, with improving Promethean Board utilization and increasing student engagement.

Article Comments

We reserve the right to remove any comment that violates our ground rules, is spammy, NSFW, defamatory, rude, reckless to the community, etc.

We expect everyone to be respectful of other commenters. It's fine to have differences of opinion, but there's no need to act like a jerk.

Use your own words (don't copy and paste from elsewhere), be honest and don't pretend to be someone (or something) you're not.

Our commenting section is self-policing, so if you see a comment that violates our ground rules, flag it (mouse over to the far right of the commenter's name until you see the flag symbol and click that), then we'll review it.